Support NeoGAF

[Durante]

Have look here:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pimax8kvr/1001502333?ref=329384&token=cc143a74

Now, at first glance this might appear like some knockoff product promising the moon, but the company has actually shipped a HMD (with higher HW resolution than anything in the "mainstream"), and they have demonstrated this one at multiple tradeshows.

Important points:

• SteamVR compatibility
• Lighthouse tracking (resolving one of the biggest issues with their first-gen attempt)
• Low-persistence display (that was another issue with their 4k HMD)
• 2*3840x2160 panels
• What they call "200°" FoV (unsire if it's actually 200°, but it's absolutely certain to be a lot more than on any existing consumer HMD)
• 75 Hz and 90 Hz support

One thing I love about these Chinese HW Kickstarters is this:

Risks and challenges

Thankfully manufacturing is not an issue, as we have delivered over 30K Pimax 4K headsets globally in half a year.

It sounds silly, but you just very rarely get the whole "we need to find a manufacturer, now we get the first prototype back, X is broken, need to respin it, send someone to china, 4 months delay here and another few months there" issue with Chinese HW projects, while you commonly get it for "western" stuff (which is still built in China).

Of course, tons of things could still go wrong with this, but I'm very intrigued.

 

[bomblord1]

Literally the only other thing I would have needed to be on board was eye tracking so that Foveated rendering could be a thing.

Otherwise an "8K" screen like this is utterly useless on even the most powerful hardware.

edit: not a fan of the design

 

[Durante]

That's wrong, even without foveated rendering. I just laid this out in the other thread:

About performance: I'm currently rendering 10.2 MP per frame for Vive in pretty much everything, more than that in some games. And that's on a 1080 (non-ti).
Throughout 2018 and with its GPUs (and continuous software-side advances in VR rendering) I think 2*4k (~16 MP) is plenty, but not overkill.

 

[Vipu]

Ummmm, but thats not 8k?

Its 2 screens with 4k.
8k = 4x 4k

 

[bomblord1]

That's wrong, even without foveated rendering. I just laid this out in the other thread:

About performance: I'm currently rendering 10.2 MP per frame for Vive in pretty much everything, more than that in some games. And that's on a 1080 (non-ti).
Throughout 2018 and with its GPUs (and continuous software-side advances in VR rendering) I think 2*4k (~16 MP) is plenty, but not overkill.

Really? Seems like my 1080 can barely scrape 4k @60fps on normal games. 2 x 4k at 90 fps seems like a pipe dream I must be doing something wrong.

 

[Durante]

Ummmm, but thats not 8k?

They say in the video its 2 screens with 4k.
8k = 4x 4k

Yes, that's why I put the "8k" in quotation marks. They use that in their marketing materials and even the product name, so not using it would be unhelpful.

It's still 8-10x the hardware resolution of existing consumer VR.

Really? Seems like my 1080 barely scrapes by 4k @60fps.

In VR games? VR games are designed for higher pixel throughput.

 

[tuxfool]

They should call it the Hammerhead.

 

[Greatest Ever]

I remember Bunnyhop trying out a lot of VR stuff a while back without too much coming to fruition. I know they've shipped an HMD but still a bit skeptical.

As you said earlier, there's not a GPU that can power this resolution yet. At 2 x 4k and presumably 90Hz, I can't imagine there will be in the near future. Did Oculus make their ASW tech useable by other companies?

 

[Durante]

You don't need to run every game at the full resolution to benefit from it.

You can certainly run some games at that res even with existing GPUs and get the full benefit, and you can run high-end games at lower res and still benefit from basically eliminated screen door effect and resolving as much detail as your system allows.

 

[Graphics Horse]

All their tiers are $1 or more? Sounds like a bargain..
edit: oh it's not live yet

 

[Caayn]

All their tiers are $1 or more? Sounds like a bargain..

Draft page

 

[bomblord1]

Yes, that's why I put the "8k" in parentheses. They use that in their marketing materials and even the product name, so not using it would be unhelpful.

It's still 8-10x the hardware resolution of existing consumer VR.


In VR games? VR games are designed for higher pixel throughput.

Yea I was talking about normal games and going off my own experience mixed with reviews of my card. I've only actually tried 1 vr game since getting my 1080 and setting my render resolution above 170 tanked my fps. Although it was kind of an experimental Unity VR game made by I think a single guy so it probably had a lot of room for improvement.

 

[StereoVsn]

Really? Seems like my 1080 can barely scrape 4k @60fps on normal games. 2 x 4k at 90 fps seems like a pipe dream I must be doing something wrong.

I have a 980TI and I really have to turn down settings to get acceptable framerate. 1080 is not that far ahead considering you have 4K per eye here. Foveated is not fully supported AMD or Nvidia just yet I thought.

 

[Durante]

Draft page

Oh, where are those images from?

That one seems to have the tracking dots on the headband which is really interesting. The other SteamVR version I saw from them has them on the HMD.
(Or maybe they aren't tracking dots?)

 

[pmj]

It's enormous. I have to wonder about the weight and comfort of this thing.

 

[Caayn]

Oh, where are those images from?

That one seems to have the tracking dots on the headband which is really interesting. The other SteamVR version I saw from them has them on the HMD.

Images from the unit they had on display during CES 2017 earlier this year. This is the source: https://tweakers.net/reviews/5127/e...aadloos-4k-breed-blikveld-en-eyetracking.html (Warning Dutch article & website). In the article they also mention that even an upscaled 2K image looked a lot better than on the Vive and OR.

 

[Durante]

It's enormous. I have to wonder about the weight and comfort of this thing.

It's apparently lighter than the initial Vive, and it uses the head mounting variation everyone seems to have settled on, so I don't think that's a big issue.

This (infuriatingly low-res) video shows what I believe is their most recent prototype.
(This one also has the typical lighthouse tracking sensors)

 

[StereoVsn]

It's enormous. I have to wonder about the weight and comfort of this thing.

The reason it's enormous appears to be because of that large wrap around FOV. Headset could be fairly light and if it's weight distributed properly that should be ok. What's interesting is that they claim compatibility with Lighthouse and SteamVR based controllers.

Edit The project looks pretty interesting. There is 0 chance I would put money on their kickstarter but will definitely follow their development. One question is where the hell are they sourcing low persistence panels like that which I assume are OLED. Even Apple is having an issue sourcing them as Samsung and LG seem to be the only suppliers.

 

[jediyoshi]

Nice they went with Steam VR tracking.

How are VR games going to hold up technically with varying FOVs as far as object culling goes? Does that generally scale gracefully with how VR games are made?

 

[Felix Lighter]

Looks to be using fresnel lenses from that one shot. Is there not a better option yet?

 

[Durante]

Nice they went with Steam VR tracking.

How are VR games going to hold up technically with varying FOVs as far as object culling goes? Does that generally scale gracefully with how VR games are made?

Any OpenVR game generally queries the VR API to get the projection matrix (https://github.com/ValveSoftware/openvr/wiki/IVRSystem::GetProjectionMatrix), and the same goes for things like resolution. The driver does the warping

As such, this isn't an issue, as long as the per-eye FoV doesn't get so large that you can't effectively use linear projection (but I don't think this is at that point).

Edit The project looks pretty interesting. There is 0 chance I would put money on their kickstarter but will definitely follow their development. One question is where the hell are they sourcing low persistence panels like that which I assume are OLED. Even Apple is having an issue sourcing them as Samsung and LG seem to be the only suppliers.

The 4k panels are not OLED, they are strobed LCD.

They have a "5k" option with two 2560x1440 panels which is apparently AMOLED.

 

[Thraktor]

Well this would definitely pass my "How easy to read is the text in Elite: Dangerous?" VR test. Include (well-implemented) foveated rendering and you've got an almost perfect HMD. Hopefully I'll get a chance to try it out at some point, although I'll hold off ordering one myself, unless they're crazy cheap.

Actually, any word on the screens they're using? OLED?

Edit: See that's answered above.

 

[mrklaw]

What would the pixels per degree be with panels like this? Might be difficult to estimate but looks like two do panels side by side (do they say if portrait or landscape?).

 

[jett]

Looks like an uncomfortable monstrosity.

 

[Durante]

What would the pixels per degree be with panels like this? Might be difficult to estimate but looks like two do panels side by side (do they say if portrait or landscape?).

If we make the highly simplifying assumptions that (a) all devices are equally good at making use of their pixels (which is probably off by a bit, but good enough for the ballpark), and that (b) manufacturer estimates of FoV are accurate (they probably all exaggerate a bit, but that's fine for comparison), then we can make some calculations.

Vive & Rift have 2160 horizontal pixels with a stated FoV of 110°. That's a PPD of 19.6.
This has 7680 horizontal pixels with a stated FoV of 200°. Which would give us a PPD of 38.4

Which makes sense: you have 8x the pixels across roughly twice the FoV, so 4x the pixel density, which gives you a 2x increase in PPD.

 

[GhostTrick]

200° ??? OH SHIIIT.
Also their page has a gif with "4k". Is it their older model or the new one ?
Damn I'd jump on a 5k one.

 

[Masterspeed]

Looks like Genji

 

[Pancakes R Us]

I was scrolling through the thread list on my phone and thought this was something about Pikmin in 8K. Hah.

 

[jett]

Is the only way of getting high FoV to have these massive visors?

 

[Durante]

200° ??? OH SHIIIT.
Also their page has a gif with "4k". Is it their older model or the new one ?
Damn I'd jump on a 5k one.

That's their older model.

Is the only way of getting high FoV to have these massive visors?

The short answer is yes.
Light doesn't bend.

Spoiler

Now no one start talking about the effects of gravity, no one is currently considering using miniature black holes in HMD production AFAIK

 

[GhostTrick]

That's their older model.

The short answer is yes.
Light doesn't bend.

Spoiler

Now no one start talking about the effects of gravity, no one is currently considering using miniature black holes in HMD production AFAIK

Nice so.I guess the 5k one will be good enough to remove screendoor effect.

 

[kami_sama]

I have a question, will it be much better if used as a 2x1080p, instead of 2x4k, compared to the Vive (in pixel look)?

 

[Shoyz]

Getting super excited for this. FOV has been my number one most important spec since DK1. When I upgraded to the Oculus DK2 I was expecting my mind to be blown; but instead oddly found myself less immersed, which I soon realized was due to the fact that FOV actually took a hit. And then, my disappointment when years later both consumer headsets still lagged behind.
They all feel too much like looking through tubes, and no matter how high the resolutions would get, if the FOV stayed at 110, I'd never feel like I was 'in' the world, just that I was looking into it.

Ultrawide FOV alone would make this headset for me, and even if the resolution was small and the screendoor still noticable, I'd get lost in it. But "8K" resolution? Getting to buy just the headset and reuse my Vive lighthouses and controllers (and soon, hopefully buy Knuckles for it?)? Targeting a december /2017/ ship date, from a company with experience in shipping headsets already?

If they've really fixed the ghosting and the brightness I don't know how this could go wrong, and be anything other than /perfect/. I'm mentally preparing myself for what I feel is inevitable disappointment, though. Too good to be true.
(I even really love the design of it, reminds me of Genji)

 

[moniker]

This sounds pretty amazing. I hope it delivers.

 

[Durante]

Getting super excited for this. FOV has been my number one most important spec since DK1. When I upgraded to the Oculus DK2 I was expecting my mind to be blown; but instead oddly found myself less immersed, which I soon realized was due to the fact that FOV actually took a hit. And then, my disappointment when years later both consumer headsets still lagged behind.
They all feel too much like looking through tubes, and no matter how high the resolutions would get, if the FOV stayed at 110, I'd never feel like I was 'in' the world, just that I was looking into it.

Ultrawide FOV alone would make this headset for me, and even if the resolution was small and the screendoor still noticable, I'd get lost in it. But "8K" resolution? Getting to buy just the headset and reuse my Vive lighthouses and controllers (and soon, hopefully buy Knuckles for it?)? Targeting a december /2017/ ship date, from a company with experience in shipping headsets already?

If they've really fixed the ghosting and the brightness I don't know how this could go wrong, and be anything other than /perfect/. I'm mentally preparing myself for what I feel is inevitable disappointment, though. Too good to be true.
(I even really love the design of it, reminds me of Genji)

Yeah, I'm also really excited.

I mean, I am sure there are tons of things that can go wrong, but the prospect of it working just half-decently (or god forbid well) with those specs is more than enough to make me bite for the HMD-only tier on the KS unless it's crazily expensive.

 

[qcf x2]

I wonder what the price would be, I guess we'll know soon enough. I would probably back this to support the progress of the technology more than because I'd actually use it.

 

[metareferential]

Given its compatibility with my existing Vive setup, if the cheaper tier (with the actual hw, that is) ends up being reasonable, I'd definitely jump on it.

 

[Lemonte]

Looks heavy.

 

[Dreamwriter]

I have a question, will it be much better if used as a 2x1080p, instead of 2x4k, compared to the Vive (in pixel look)?

When rendering at the same resolution as Vive it will have less space between the pixels, so a bit more solid of a picture (less “screen door effect”). However, the picture will feel lower resolution than Vive in that situation because those pixels will be spread out over roughly twice the area. That’s one reason why Oculus Rift looks sharper than Vive, Rift has slightly lower FOV for the same number of pixels.

Looks heavy.

The video posted earlier shows it on a scale versus Vive, Vive was heavier.

 

[dampflokfreund]

needs eye tracking for foveated rendering

 

[Durante]

needs eye tracking for foveated rendering

The potential for foveated rendering is great, but I don't see a realistic way for an independent product like this to spearhead that.

What makes this so enticing (and what makes it possible for a small company to offer a meaningful and desirable product) is that I can use it to play the huge number of OpenVR games I already own at significantly higher fidelity.

To make use of foveated rendering, all the software needs to be aware of it and support it.

 

[kami_sama]

When rendering at the same resolution as Vive it will have less space between the pixels, so a bit more solid of a picture (less ”screen door effect"). However, the picture will feel lower resolution than Vive in that situation because those pixels will be spread out over roughly twice the area. That's one reason why Oculus Rift looks sharper than Vive, Rift has slightly lower FOV for the same number of pixels.

Well, that'd be if it was the same resolution as the Vive, no?
But the Vive is 2 1280x1080p screens, right? That's 2560 pixels on a 110º FOV.
By comparison, two 1080p screens would be 3840 pixels on a 200º FOV.
That's around 23 pixels per degree on the Vive and 19.2 for this HMD.
So worse, but not spread over twice the area.

The potential for foveated rendering is great, but I don't see a realistic way for an independent product like this to spearhead that.

What makes this so enticing (and what makes it possible for a small company to offer a meaningful and desirable product) is that I can use it to play the huge number of OpenVR games I already own at significantly higher fidelity.

To make use of foveated rendering, all the software needs to be aware of it and support it.

That's why I am waiting for HTC (or whoever buys their HMD business) or Occulus to release a HDM with eye tracking.
Until then, I would need a great deal to buy a VR system.

 

[UrbanRats]

Looks like an uncomfortable monstrosity.

Looks more comfortable that the HTC Vive and Oculus, using the PSVR-like ergonomics.

My only real worry is what kind of hardware you'd need to push 8K in the first place, but it can upscale anyway.

 

[Sir Doom]

There is no 8K content worth playing on VR

 

[Shifty]

lmao that design

2x4k VR with super high FOV sounds mental. What hardware does one even use to drive that at 90hz?

 

[tokkun]

Looks to be using fresnel lenses from that one shot. Is there not a better option yet?

Really makes me wonder about the value of high FoV. The sharp region of the lenses on the Vive is already much narrower than the FoV of the headset. I don't really find myself wanting a larger FoV, because if I'm not looking straight ahead the image gets blurry.

Setting aside foveated rendering, they would probably benefit a lot from being able to render statically partitioned areas of the screen at a lower resolution. The 4K pixel density is probably overkill for the actual resolving power of the glass and eye in the periphery of the screen. In the case of the glass, you don't need eye tracking to know what portions of the image to render at lower resolution.

 

[Gnub]

That sucker looks heavy as hell. I would rnd up with a Sway Callaway neck messin' with this.

 

[Dreamwriter]

lmao that design



2x4k VR with super high FOV sounds mental. What hardware does one even use to drive that at 90hz?

Dual 1080ti with VR SLI would do the trick with most current VR games - unfortunately the game has to be built to support VR SLI, which most VR games aren’t yet.

 

[Thraktor]

The potential for foveated rendering is great, but I don't see a realistic way for an independent product like this to spearhead that.

What makes this so enticing (and what makes it possible for a small company to offer a meaningful and desirable product) is that I can use it to play the huge number of OpenVR games I already own at significantly higher fidelity.

To make use of foveated rendering, all the software needs to be aware of it and support it.

I suspect we'll see a standard for foveated rendering arrive from Khonos's OpenXR group, as afaik there are a couple of companies on there that work on it, but it'll likely be a while before it's standardized, let alone implemented in commercial products. It's still worth talking about, though, as it would make rendering at native resolution on a HMD like this actually feasible for relatively normal gaming PCs.

 

[metareferential]

There is no 8K content worth playing on VR

All existing openVR games?

Something like Assetto Corsa or Raw Data would benefit immensely from an higher FOV and reduced screen-door (and those two games I can already run at crazy high res anyway).